The Positive Power of No: Why My Son Will Learn To Say It

On Saturday afternoon I took Declan to the grocery store with me to pick up a few ingredients we needed to make cookies (so good!). It seems like DJ is growing every day-- he's learning new words, playing new games, and shooting up like a weed-- and every day it seems like he does something different to remind me how big he's getting. On Saturday this thing was to somehow throw himself over the edge of the race car cart he was sitting in (I'm that mom, now), and reach for a box of fruit loops. He didn't fall out, for those of you keeping score at home (he was strapped in), but he did manage to knock the cereal off the shelf and attempt to bite a hole in it.

He was quite pleased with himself. (I was secretly impressed.) But, while this behavior is probably very age appropriate, it is not something socially acceptable, so I told him (brace yourself), "No, sir."

I didn't yell. I didn't bend him over my knee and deliver a spanking. I didn't even sound angry. I took the cereal, put it back on the shelf, and attempted to proceed with my day.

The woman a few feet away from me, who'd observed the entire exchange, looked at me and kindly told me "You know, you really shouldn't tell him no. It could be very damaging to his self-esteem and psyche."

Thanks, Dr. Phil, I felt like telling her, but I've got it under control. I just smiled and nodded and mumbled a half-hearted "thanks" and went on my way, though.

Here's the thing that gets me: This woman (and I truly believe she was well meaning) was not the first person to express her distaste for the word "no" when children are concerned. And it makes me want to pull my hair out. Not because I feel judged (I'm used to society judging me as a mom, at this point), or because she butted into my business (it takes a community, or something like that), but because the whole concept seems fundamentally wrong to me, and it's one that is affecting the world in a big way, even if we're not seeing the whole picture yet.

Hard truth #1: Limits exist.

They're a real, sometimes tangible, sometimes not, thing, and I want my son to know this. I want him to understand that there are both natural and imposed limits in the world, and that there are both natural and imposed limits to his own abilities and actions. And I want him to learn this under the safety and protection of my care-- from somebody who loves him and nurtures him and will help him test these limits out.

I get that he's only one and a half years old. I don't expect him to heed my "no" every time I utter the syllable, nor do I interpret the times when he does not as blatant defiance. But I'm not going to wait until he is capable of completely understanding the concept to introduce it to him. Imagine how baffled he'd be if he woke up on his second (or third) birthday and I suddenly had rules but hadn't before.

I know that there are a lot of people who don't take issue with limits, but encourage others to enforce these limits in positive ways. For example, instead of saying "No, do not jump into the bath with all of your clothing on" say "Declan, you have a choice. Jumping in the tub with your clothes on is not a good choice." Firstly, good luck with that, because my kid is swimming by now, and, secondly, to me this is a damaging concept. Damaging because it's not an accurate reflection of how things work. Refer back to hard truth #1. Limits exist. (I reiterated in case you didn't feel like looking back.) Limits exist and there is not always a choice involved. And I think it's far more damaging in the long run to spin this reality as if "this is a choice/limit."

If we make "no" a taboo thing, of course it's going to be damaging when our children hear it. If Declan spends his whole Pre-K life thinking of the world as a series of choices that he controls, kindergarten (and life thereafter) is going to really stink. Of course his feelings will be hurt when his teacher tells him no. (On the other side of this, I think abusing/overusing the word no has the opposite effect-- kids become desensitized to it.) But if I introduce the concept of "no" in a non-threatening, safe way (no, son, chewing through a box of fruit loops we haven't paid for in the middle of Food Lion isn't going to fly), he's going to have a much healthier perception of the world and of himself.

And to address the other concern parents (and random women in the grocery store) bring up when it comes to the concept of "no," I am not worried that Declan will learn to say the word "no" and throw it in my face. I'm sure this will happen. I hope it happens. I'll probably eat my words on this later, but I think "no" is a powerful and worthwhile concept, and I want Declan to learn that "no" is not just something imposed on him by Mom and Dad and his teachers, but that it's something he has the right to express as well. Does this mean every time he says the word "no" he's suddenly exempt from a certain activity? Obviously not, and he'll catch on, but it's a concept he should learn and have a healthy grasp of. There are too many yes men in this world, and my son will not be one of them.

End rant.

Also, happy Thanksgiving!!

I Prefer When People Say Happy Holidays

"But Val, aren't you a Christian?" you ask? "Shouldn't this season be about Christ?"

The answer to both of those questions is, in my opinion, yes, which is precisely why I like the idea of "happy holidays." I'm not sure when or how this happened (though I have an idea), but somewhere along the way many Christians became convinced that the perpetuating of the phrase "happy holidays" is a liberal agenda to take Christ out of the meaning of Christmas. (To all of those who are muttering under their breath about the fact that Christmas was not originally even a celebration of Christ's birth, but rather of the winter solstice, I'm aware, but I'm not going to address that because it's irrelevant to my point.)

I guess, in some way, I understand why the phrase "happy holidays" could be annoying. I've uttered merry Christmas before only to be chided with "happy holidays to you too." That's ridiculous and unnecessary. Who honestly has that much time to be offended over something like that?

To get back to my point, though, here is why I do like "happy holidays" more than "merry Christmas."

Most people don't celebrate Christmas.

Most people enjoy their Christmas pandora radio station, hot chocolate, senseless trips to the mall, cold weather, hidden elves, and watching Will Ferrell in green tights fifty times in one month. Cookies and candy canes and wreathes and trees. I enjoy these things too.

But that's not really Christmas. And, frankly, it frustrates me that this has come to be what Christmas amounts to. The solution, however, is not to force everyone into saying "merry Christmas." Most people have made apparent that they don't see Christ at the center of the holiday season, so let them say what they really mean (happy holidays) and let Christmas be for those who mean it.

I haven't stopped saying merry Christmas, because that's what I celebrate (and I make this no secret), but I also don't feel like I'm sticking it to the man when I do so. If someone prefers I wish them a happy holiday season, or a happy Hannukah or some other holiday, I'm happy to honor that desire, and I don't feel like I'm doing a disservice to Christ when I do that.  In fact, on the contrary, I think the allowance of "happy holidays" helps to break the phenomenon of cultural Christianity. (And by this I mean the trend of people going to church because it's part of their culture, but not really believing in or following after Christ.)

I'm not posting this as an encouragement to stop using the phrase "merry Christmas," but rather as encouragement to consider why the phrase "happy holidays" makes you angry (if it does), and if it's really worth it.